This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Fix two problems with reorder_blocks and debugging
On Sat, Jul 22, 2006 at 10:32:42AM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 09:44:23PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
> >> If you're interested, we do have 9 debugging regressions. (Click on
> >> serious regressions on gcc.gnu.org, edit search to look for the "debug"
> >> component.)
> >
> > Yes, I looked at the list last night, and will be working on some of
> > them this weekend (probably starting with the one I filed :-).
>
> Thanks! (In looking at the list, I saw you'd found some nasties!)
>
> Making GCC 4.2 more GDB-friendly would be a very, very good thing.
Is general degradation of debuggability considered a regression? I'm
sure there is some compiler in GCC's history, even recent history,
which did not reorder blocks in a way that needed DW_AT_ranges support;
so the fact that we now need it and it doesn't work would be a
regression. But that's stretching a little bit more than I'm
comfortable with.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
CodeSourcery